| Literature DB >> 35222329 |
Olha Matviichuk1,2, Leslie Mondamert1, Claude Geffroy1, Margaux Gaschet2, Christophe Dagot2, Jérôme Labanowski1.
Abstract
Continuous exposure to low concentrations of antibiotics (sub-minimal inhibitory concentration: sub-MIC) is thought to lead to the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in the environmental microbiota. However, the relationship between antibiotic exposure and resistance selection in environmental bacterial communities is still poorly understood and unproven. Therefore, we measured the concentration of twenty antibiotics, resistome quality, and analyzed the taxonomic composition of microorganisms in river biofilms collected upstream (UPS) and downstream (DWS) (at the point of discharge) from the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) of Poitiers (France). The results of statistical analysis showed that the antibiotic content, resistome, and microbiome composition in biofilms collected UPS were statistically different from that collected DWS. According to Procrustes analysis, microbial community composition and antibiotics content may be determinants of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) composition in samples collected DWS. However, network analysis showed that the occurrence and concentration of antibiotics measured in biofilms did not correlate with the occurrence and abundance of antibiotic resistance genes and mobile genetic elements. In addition, network analysis suggested patterns of co-occurrence between several ARGs and three classes of bacteria/algae: Bacteroidetes incertae sedis, Cyanobacteria/Chloroplast, and Nitrospira, in biofilm collected UPS. The absence of a direct effect of antibiotics on the selection of resistance genes in the collected samples suggests that the emergence of antibiotic resistance is probably not only due to the presence of antibiotics but is a more complex process involving the cumulative effect of the interaction between the bacterial communities (biotic) and the abiotic matrix. Nevertheless, this study confirms that WWTP is an important reservoir of various ARGs, and additional efforts and legislation with clearly defined concentration limits for antibiotics and resistance determinants in WWTP effluents are needed to prevent their spread and persistence in the environment.Entities:
Keywords: antibiotic resistance; antibiotics; microbiome; network analysis; resistome; river biofilm; wastewater treatment plant (WWTP)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35222329 PMCID: PMC8863943 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.795206
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
FIGURE 1Dynamic of panel (A) ATBs concentration in ng/g of biofilm, of panel (B) cumulative abundance of the resistome, grouped into gene classes and of panel (C) most abundant bacterial phyla in biofilms collected UPS and DWS of the WWTP. Due to analytical problems results for October (resistome composition) and for September (taxonomic composition) are not included.
Results of the statistical comparison of the concentration of ATBs and normalized abundance of RGs measured in biofilms collected UPS and DWS from the WWPT.
| Comparison of ATBs concentration | Comparison of normalized abundance of resistance genes and MGEs | |
| Wilks’ lambda | 0.000002770 | 0.00000648 |
| F (Observed value) | 22,566.915 | 10,283.206 |
| F (Critical value) | 246.464 | 245.950 |
| 0.005 | 0.008 | |
| Alpha | 0.05 | 0.05 |
FIGURE 2Bray–Curtis based NMDS plots showing difference between square root transformed data of panel (A) taxonomic composition (Goodness-of-fit: R2 = 0.61, p-value < 0.001; Adonis test: R2 = 0.53, p-value = 0.002; Stress = 0.087), panel (B) ATBs composition (Goodness-of-fit: R2 = 0.83, p-value < 0.001; Adonis test: R2 = 0.68, p-value < 0.001; Stress = 0.045) and panel (C) resistome composition (Goodness-of-fit: R2 = 0.68, p-value < 0.001; Adonis test: R2 = 0.51, p-value < 0.001; Stress = 0.013) between studied biofilms by sampling site and season [samples were divided into three corresponding seasons: summer (June—August), autumn (September—November), and winter (December—February)]. Due to analytical problems results for September (taxonomic composition) and October (resistome composition) are not included. The samples were named by the month of sampling, but they actually reflect the 30 days prior to the sampling date.
FIGURE 3A spider chart showing the range (from min to max) of antibiotics concentrations measured in biofilms collected upstream (UPS) and downstream (DWS) from the WWTP compared to PNEC-MIC.
FIGURE 4NMDS-based procrustean analysis showing correlation between resistome and ATB content (A,B) and resistome and microbial community (C,D) for both studied sites. M2, sum of squares, r, correlation in a symmetric Procrustes rotation, P, p-value (significance).
Summary table of correlation between resistome and ATBs in concentrations corresponding to the three ranges of the MSW hypothesis.
| Antibiotic concentration/Related RGs | UPS | DWS | ||||
| < MSC | MSC-MIC | > MIC | < MSC | MSC-MIC | > MIC | |
| CPR | – | – | – | – | + | + |
| – | – | – | – | |||
| ENR | + | – | + | + | – | + |
| – | – | |||||
| FMQ | + | + | – | – | + | – |
| – | – | – | – | |||
| LVX | – | + | + | – | + | + |
| – | – | |||||
| NFX | + | + | + | – | + | + |
| – | – |
| ||||
| AZM | – | + | + | – | + | + |
| – |
|
| – | |||
| CLR | + | + | – | – | + | + |
| – |
| – | – | – | – | |
| ERY | + | – | – | – | + | + |
| – | – | – | – | – | ||
| RXM | + | – | – | + | – | + |
| – | – | – | – | |||
| SPR | + | + | – | – | + | + |
| – | – | – | – | – | ||
| T-T | + | – | – | + | – | – |
| – | – | – | – | – | ||
| SMX | + | – | – | + | – | – |
| – | – | – | – | |||
| MTZ | + | + | – | – | + | – |
| – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| OTC | + | + | – | + | – | – |
| – | – | – | – | – | ||
| TMP | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| – | – | – | – | – | – | |
The first column lists all antibiotics with already defined concentration ranges for the mutant selection window (MSC and MIC). There are two rows opposite each antibiotic. The top row shows the concentration range in which the antibiotic was measured in the biofilm (highlighted in green), and the bottom row shows whether the network analysis showed a link between that antibiotic and the corresponding RGs, and if so, with which gene.
Summary table of correlation between resistome and microbial communities.
| Microbial communities | Genes Biofilms | ||
| Phylum | Class | UPS | DWS |
| Acidobacteria |
|
| |
| Actinobacteria |
| – | – |
| Bacteroidetes |
| – | |
|
| – | – | |
|
| – | – | |
| Gemmatimonadetes |
| – | |
| Proteobacteria |
| – | – |
|
| – | – | |
|
| – | – | |
|
| – | ||
| Verrucomicrobia |
| – |
|
|
| – | – | |
|
| – | ||
| Candidatus Saccharibacteria |
| – | |
| Chloroplast |
| – | |
| Cyanobacteria |
| – | |
| Firmicutes |
| – | – |
|
| – | – | |
| Nitrospirae |
| – | |